Preparing For Honda K24a3/AST5 6spd Conversion

darwoodious

Darin Nelson
How about turning it into an X1/9 dune buggy?
Yeah, this would be the coolest dune-buggy for sure. I think if it had the built-in rollbar still without a window it'd be even better tho. Although I think it'd be great if someone did this, I certainly am opting-out... no time.

Thanks for posting tho. Very cool.
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Not to highjack this thread but similar problems arose when I was installing the Abarth engine in my test body that needed to be resolved. Use of the spare tire compartment is often a solution for more room in the engine bay in engine swaps. View attachment 15377
TonyK

Grimsby Ontario Canada.
Hey Tony - do you have more detailed pics of how you joined the angle iron & caster positioning for your bay? Any reference pics wold be great :)
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Looking at my shifter parts. Got the RSX shifter bracket. Alignment is completely off with this year/version 6speed, this is with one bolt. I'll cut up the stock aluminum bracket & use it to make a base for this bracket



Will use cable barrels from an old Volvo to mount the (MWB) cables like DennisH. Cut off the rod ends where the wire is crimped & tap the rods w/ 10-32 UNF to match the cable ends. When I saw his pics, I could tell the RSX setup was same as Volvo used in the 90's. I'll drill out the barrels when I have the actual cables here to play with.



 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Of course it would be Volvo. What else is there? :)
No one :D

Worked on the bracket layout some today. Tried cutting down the aluminum TSX bracket, but no way that will align.

So, I'll have to make a new one. Going to use a selection of Volvo brackets of course. This puts it about 1.25-1.5" back from stock offset. Now I have to triangulate off that using the casing bolt hole visible under the lower cable to add support & bolt points for the other leg

 

TonyK

True Classic
Hey Tony - do you have more detailed pics of how you joined the angle iron & caster positioning for your bay? Any reference pics wold be great :)

Sorry I forgot about this. I changed to larger casters because the smaller ones were to hard to push the test body around with the engine in it.

Here are some pictures.

TonyK.

Grimsby Ontario Canada

IMG_0681.JPG
IMG_0682.JPG
IMG_0683.JPG
IMG_0684.JPG
IMG_0685.JPG
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Sorry I forgot about this. I changed to larger casters because the smaller ones were to hard to push the test body around with the engine in it.

Here are some pictures.

TonyK.

Grimsby Ontario Canada
Thank you, Tony. For my reference, what OD casters are those? 6"? or larger? Mine look to be somewhere in-between - based on appearance.
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Reviewing some elements of the install process from earlier in my thread, I just noticed the entrenching tool up against the wall behind the gs tank. Is that WWII era? I have a few 1/6th scale examples :D







TonyK

Grimsby Ontario Canada.
 
Last edited:

kmead

Old enough to know better
I had so many of those items when I was a kid. Where’s your Scout Car? Or were those not a Hasbro product?
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Continued with the bracket today.

Added second support leg, bolted prior to weld to allow for determining alignment



Welded in place, then added inner support.



then welded support for middle. Captive nuts welded to underside for the three mount points





Everything seems to be aligned nicely, with around 1.25" offset from stock mount position

 

lookforjoe

True Classic
I had so many of those items when I was a kid. Where’s your Scout Car? Or were those not a Hasbro product?
Not familiar with the scout car, is it the same as this? This is the ActionMan Armoured Car. ActionMan is what I grew up with - the UK licensed version of GIJoe.

 

kmead

Old enough to know better
No it was a bit better model, odd that the British version would model a British vehicle poorly. I think I received it for Christmas in 1964 or ‘65.

It was also a Ferret but a bit better model. In any case yes that type.

5639474B-BDE3-49CF-B215-DC92B4C6C633.jpeg
2304DFE1-3172-4B8F-A05D-F93ED726E6E5.jpeg
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
No it was a bit better model, odd that the British version would model a British vehicle poorly. I think I received it for Christmas in 1964 or ‘65.

It was also a Ferret but a bit better model. In any case yes that type.
The hard plastic Jeep was a better toy. The blow-molded stuff was never my favorite. Same with the 70's AT stuff - The MSV was the best, in terms of play value.









I have collected a few of them.... :D



..along with those cool 'copters...

 
Last edited:

kmead

Old enough to know better
Dang you got all the cool stuff. I did have the Jeep, actually two of them with the recoilless rifle, the trailer and the search light.

I ended up collecting WBritains (like my Dad) but sadly with all the moves in my life those things all went away.

The MSV wasn’t something I was ever graced with. Nice. Those copters too.

Nice other hobby.
 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Copied this over from here, to further discussion relative to my build

Rodger did as what was called for by MWB. You can do that and all good, or do what I did...

View attachment 19173 View attachment 19174
This first photo shows what I did instead of the heavy stock: a somewhat thick 14G (0.0747") sheet welded across.

The MWB team recommends cutting out the entire lower area for exhaust or something. I agree but wanted to be able to transfer load from that lower crossmember to the upper crossmember, so I built this:
View attachment 19171

Here's what it looks like all installed.
View attachment 19172 View attachment 19168 View attachment 19169 View attachment 19170

Here's my (hillbilly) thinking... The primary reason to reinforce the rear crossmember with the K20 kit is that the subframe takes ALL the torque from the engine at the suspension points. Nice, but now you need to reinforce. The primary torque under full throttle will be to twist the powertrain "back" (that is clockwise when looking at the driver from the left side of the vehicle) to power the vehicle forward. As I've said before - imagine the X trying to "pop a wheelie", then you get it.

So all the force on the subframe, this the crossmember, is down. My goal was twofold: beef up the cross member lightly with nice tall/wide plates then look at how that transferred load to the rest of the chassis.

I am trying to make it strong but keep the extra weight as low as possible. No idea if I have succeeded, but I have to go with my gut. It's my money so I'm doing my build my way. Hope this helps. Keep posting what you're doing to your build Hussein. :)
Looking at all the pics of that crossmember, it is primarily attached below the frame rails, into the inner fender skin. There are two triangular sections that travel up & back into the frame rails under the trunk floor, but nothing going forward.

The two things I'm thinking are that perhaps it would be of benefit to add gussets inboard, from the rail back to the crossmember, and to add a box section across the top, where the single partition/trunk floor seam currently exists. A cross brace in other words.

I used yours & Rodger's photos as guides here







Didn't really need to do all that, since I can just add to the actual photos...





 

lookforjoe

True Classic
Another area to add to - the other side of where the crossmember is reduced for engine clearance,

credits to Rodger & TonyK for photos used for reference


adding a box section below the access panel frame





referencing TonyK's

 

darwoodious

Darin Nelson
I'm assuming nearly all the stress on the rear subframe mount, thus also the rear suspension pickup points, is down under acceleration. The suspension itself handles lateral loads in corners (thus left/right) as well as pushing the car forward. Those pickup points at the rear clearly are handling lateral load mostly where the front points of the rear suspension arm handle the forward/aft load.

So for the rear I attempted to transfer the load from the pickup points up to trunk floor crossmember, which as you know stock is not really that strong. In the early cars without the trunk access panel the load gets transferred to the upper crossmember. I wanted trunk access so added that into my car but made the access panel a load bearing member (as discussed on my chassis thread here https://xwebforums.com/forum/index.php?threads/project-overkill-chassis.34807/page-3#post-299818)

I marked up your very well drawn drawing to illustrate the loads I think are happening.
IMG-7767.jpg


On the rear firewall I did something similar to what you are talking about, but again I used some 14G plate there on both sides along with a reinforcement where the tunnel attaches to the rear firewall. I didn't think to add more box section there since it is already a box section, just a little smaller box!
WP_20160528_13_17_46_Pro (1).jpg


WP_20160531_22_54_19_Pro (1).jpg


I've also sacrifices the ease of behind-the-passenger-seat area from a cardboard cover and fabbed an aluminum one that should really strengthen up the rear firewall.
IMG_2038.JPG

IMG_2036 (1).JPG


This rear access cover uses the same type of beveled 45º conical fasteners with a matching milled bevel in the aluminum in hopes of transferring all of the shear forces - but getting those to work correctly is a total pain. I've found the best way to do it is to set the holes then weld up the weld-nuts on the back when it is all attached ensuring that it will fit when I'm done welding.
 
Top